Tag: MEMS

  • Aceinna launches open-source GNSS+IMU development kit for drones, robots

    Aceinna launches open-source GNSS+IMU development kit for drones, robots

    Photo: Aceinna
    Photo: Aceinna

    MEMS-based sensing solutions company Acienna released OpenIMU, a professionally supported, open-source GPS/GNSS-aided inertial navigation software stack for low-cost precise navigation applications.

    Integrating an inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based sensor network will greatly improve its navigation and self-location capabilities, Acienna said.

    It is aimed at developing autonomously guided vehicles for industrial applications, autonomous cars, factory or industrial robots, drones, remotely operated underwater vehicle or any kind of smart machine that needs to move fast or slow, on land, in the air or in water.

    “Our breakthrough open-source software for INS/GPS algorithm development is the first professional grade open-source navigation stack running on a low-cost IMU,” said Mike Horton, CTO of Aceinna. “Not only will this kit save developers time and money, it is simple to use and does not require a Ph.D.”

    OpenIMU enables advanced, easy-to-deploy localization and navigation algorithm solutions for a fraction of the time and cost of traditional methods, Aceinna said.

    OpenIMU’s combination of open-source software and low-cost hardware enables rapid development of advanced solutions for drones, robotics, and autonomous applications. Its extensible software-infrastructure provides all the code needed for algorithm development.

    The freely downloadable stack includes:

    • FreeRTOS-based data collection and sampling engine
    • Performance-tuned, real-time, navigation-grade GPS/INS Kalman filter library
    • Free IDE/compiler tool chain based on Visual Studio Code
    • JTAG debugging for debugging code loaded on IMU
    • Data logging, graphing, Allen Variance plots and maps
    • Extensive documentation
    • Robust simulation environment with advanced sensor error models

    To install OpenIMU stack now, follow the directions. Several ready-to-install free GPS/INS and IMU applications are available at Aceinna’s Navigation app store.

    The OpenIMU Development hardware development kit includes JTAG-pod, precision mount fixture, EVB and an OpenIMU300 module.

    The OpenIMU module features Aceinna’s 5 deg/Hr, 9-Axis gyro, accelerometer, and magnetometer sensor suite with an onboard 180-MHz ARM Coretex floating-point CPU.

    The IMU is delivered in a 24 x 37 x 9.5 millimeter module that operates at 2.7-5.5 VDC.

    The OpenIMU Development kit is available for immediate delivery.

  • Inertial navigation emerges as winning co-star for transportation sector

    Inertial navigation emerges as winning co-star for transportation sector

    Signals other than GNSS are the key to positioning for both the transportation and machine control markets. While many solutions are being developed, inertial navigation systems (INS) are emerging as the primary GNSS co-star.

    In our survey, nearly three quarters (72%) of respondents in this sector said positioning could best rely on tight integration between GNSS and INS. For comparison, inertial technology wasn’t even mentioned in the 2017 State of the GNSS Industry Report. This year for the first time, GPS World offered an Inertial Buyers Guide for our readers (see our May issue).

    What is the best additional solution for positioning in GPS/GNSS-challenged environments? (Source: GPS World 2018 State of the Industry survey)
    What is the best additional solution for positioning in GPS/GNSS-challenged environments? (Source: GPS World 2018 State of the GNSS Industry survey)

    Practical autonomous navigation — the current ambition of automakers (and Google) — hits a roadblock when it comes to uninterrupted positioning. We all know GNSS reception has its limits, notably in many places that vehicles travel such as tunnels, beside tall buildings and in parking garages. Inertial positioning fills that gap, making it especially advantageous for meeting the challenges of autonomous navigation.

    Inertial measurement units are generally based on multi-axis combinations of precision gyroscopes, accelerometers and magnetometers using algorithms to determine location, direction and position. Gyroscopes measure the angular velocity; accelerometers measure overall acceleration; and magnetometers provide the direction of the magnetic field.

    Micro-electro-mechanical (MEMS) techniques have reduced the size, power consumption and costs of INS systems considerably, enabling their use in ever more applications, including unmanned aerial vehicles.

    As a result, products that combine GNSS + INS are being introduced at an increasing rate, with more than a dozen major announcements in the past year. According to one study, the INS market is projected to grow from US$11.89 billion in 2017 to US$19.67 billion by 2023, a compound annual growth rate of 8.76%.


    For more results from the 2018 State of the GNSS Industry, see this page.

  • Three-axis gyro launched for optical image stabilization

    Three-axis gyro launched for optical image stabilization

    Photo: Gladiator Technologies
    Photo: Gladiator Technologies

    Gladiator Technologies has introduced a three-axis, inertial rate system gyroscope. The G300D gyro is 0.67 cubic inches, low power and high speed, making it suitable for image stabilization applications, the company said.

    The G300D has message timing under 150 microseconds and output data rates up to 8 kHz with external sync. A micro-electro-mechanical gyroscope, it has an ARW of <0.0028 degrees/sec/√Hz and an option for both 24 and 32-Bit LSB for exceptional resolution.

    Users can configure the G300D to their desired configuration using a software development kit or through software protocols to simplify the integration process.

    “The G300D, with a 250-Hz bandwidth, allows user to replace more complicated and expensive gyros for image stabilization applications,” said Rand Hulsing, chief scientist at Gladiator Technologies. “The three-axis package is also convenient for mounting in any orientation for tight space requirements.”

    “The G300D product is a good example of our SX-series architecture, which has enabled Gladiator to extend our sensor fusion technologies into high speed applications with message latency under 150 usec,” said Lee Dunbar, chief software architect at Gladiator Technologies. “This output offers minimal phase lag like an analog sensor by virtually eliminating typical signal processing and digital conversion overheads.”

    The G300D gyro is non-ITAR.

  • STMicroelectronics offers automotive-grade inertial sensor

    STMicroelectronics has introduced the automotive-grade ASM330LHH six-axis inertial sensor for super-high-resolution motion tracking in advanced vehicle navigation and telematics applications.

    Photo: STMicroelectronics
    Photo: STMicroelectronics

    Serving demands for continuous, accurate vehicle location to support automated services, the ASM330LHH lets advanced dead-reckoning algorithms calculate precise position from sensor data if satellite signals are blocked, such as in urban canyons, tunnels, covered roadways, parking garages or dense forests.

    Its advanced, low-noise, temperature-stable design enables dependable telematics services such as e-tolling, tele-diagnostics and e-Call assistance. Precision inertial data in six axes also meets the needs of advanced automated-driving systems, the company said.

    Automotive component manufacturer Magneti Marelli has selected the ASM330LHH for advanced telematics systems, to be fitted as original equipment by global automotive groups in upcoming vehicle ranges.

    For the ASM330LHH, as with all its MEMS sensors, STMicroelectronics owns the entire manufacturing process, from designing the sensors, through wafer fabrication, packaging, test, calibration and supply. Full end-to-end control enables STMicroelectronics to create high-performing sensors and assure customers of a robust and responsive supply chain, with rigorous end-of-line quality screening, the company said.

    “STMicroelectronics is the largest supplier of MEMS sensors for automotive non-safety applications, such as navigation and telematics,” said Andrea Onetti, Analog, MEMS and Sensors Group vice president at STMicroelectronics. “Our latest-generation inertial sensor, the automotive-grade ASM330LHH, enables precise positioning for safer, smarter driving.”

    Engineering samples will be available for evaluation by the third quarter of 2018, and volume production will begin the following quarter.

    Further technical information on the ASM330LHH

    • Temperature range up 105 degrees Celsius giving designers extra freedom to locate electronic controls in hot areas such as in smart antennas on the vehicle roof, or near the engine compartment.
    • Ultra low noise allows greater measurement resolution by minimizing integration errors when positioning is reliant on sensors only.
    • High linearity and built-in temperature compensation eliminate any need for external compensation algorithms over its operating range.
    • Lowest power consumption in class, with features for optimizing power management if battery usage becomes crucial.
    • Qualified according to AEC-Q100 automotive-grade robustness standard.
    • Built on STMicroelectronics’ proven, proprietary ThELMA MEMS process technology, which enables integration of both the three-axis accelerometer and three-axis angular-rate sensor (gyroscope) on the same silicon for optimum yield, quality, and reliability.
    • The electronic interface integrates the signal chain for both sensors on a single die using STMicroelectronics’ 130nm HCMOS9A technology.
    • Reference designs, as well as STMicroelectronics’ Teseo satellite-positioning modules and related software are available. The dead-reckoning algorithm included with the Teseo III GNSS-receiver chipset already supports the ASM330LHH to generate a high-accuracy output suitable for autonomous navigation.
    • Tiny, low-profile 3mm x 2.5mm x 0.83mm device for minimal impact on the size of any on-board module.
    • Packaged as a leadless Land Grid Array (LGA) device.
  • Launchpad: Rugged handhelds, aerial pollinator

    Launchpad: Rugged handhelds, aerial pollinator

    A roundup of recent products in the GNSS and inertial positioning industry from the May 2018 issue of GPS World magazine.

    SURVEY & MAPPING

    Rugged handhelds

    Operate in harsh environments

    The UT series of GNSS-capable rugged handheld devices support industries such as construction, survey, GIS, mapping, asset/logistics management, public safety, utilities and military. The UT10 6-inch rugged phone and UT30 8-inch rugged tablet both feature Android 8.0 operating systems with Qualcomm octa-core 2.2 GHz processors, 4 GB of RAM and 32GB onboard storage.The UT50 10.1-inch full-rugged tablet features the Windows 10 operating system with an Intel Core Skylake i5 processor up to 2.8 GHz, 8 GB RAM and 128 GB of onboard storage. All three new UT models provide the latest high-resolution, capacitive touchscreen and direct sunlight-readable display technology for ease of visibility in all situations. The UT50 also has a 10-finger multi-touchscreen and supports wet hands and gloves operation. The devices have dual built-in cameras. They are designed to be drop-resistant from heights of 1.2 meters (1.5 meters for the UT10), are rated at IP67 (IP68 for UT50), and are certified to both MIL-STD-810G and MIL-STD-461F military standards to ensure durability in most outdoor or challenging environments.

    Hemisphere GNSS, hemispheregnss.com

    Controller and apps

    For GNSS or total station operations

    Trimble TSC7 controller.

    The Trimble TSC7 controller is a new field solution for land and civil construction surveyors. Equipped with GPS, it provides a tablet experience with a physical keyboard and a sunlight-readable 7-inch touchscreen that supports pinch, tap and slide gestures. Front- and rear-facing cameras allow users to video conference their office from the field for on-the-job support, and capture high-definition videos and images that provide valuable context to their data and clients. The TSC7 uses Windows 10 Professional with an Intel Pentium 64-bit quad-core processor. The processor and operating system make it easy to process data in spreadsheets and run office software programs. An ergonomic form factor, IP68-certified rugged design and optional, user-interchangeable modules make the TSC7 a flexible solution for all surveying applications.

    Trimble, www.trimble.com


    UAV

    OEM GNSS/IMU Module

    Enhances light UAVs

    The AsteRx-i combines a multi-frequency multi-constellation GNSS engine with an external industrial-grade MEMS-based inertial measurement unit (IMU) to deliver positioning to the centimeter level as well as full 3D attitude at high update rates and low latency. The AsteRx-i is suitable for optical inspection and photogrammetry. Accompanied by a UAS-tailored carrier board, it integrates seamlessly into light UAVs. It also features Septentrio’s AIM+ interference monitoring and mitigation system.

    Septentrio, septentrio.com

    Aerial pollinator

    Aids fruit tree growers

    DropCopter’s pollen distribution system.

    UAS startup DropCopter has initiated a drone pollination service that uses multi-rotor drones to dust almonds, pistachios and cherries, boosting crops by up to 15 percent. Dropcopter’s patent-pending Worker-Bee pollinator helps growers overcome environmental factors like bee shortages, as well as wind, cold, and night time that would prevent honeybee activity. The company is partnered with GENIUS NY and The NUAIR Alliance.

    DropCopter, dropcopter.com

    Drone Camera

    Sensor Optimized for Drone Applications (S.O.D.A.)

    Photo: sensefly
    Photo: senseFly

    The senseFly S.O.D.A. camera is built for professional drone photogrammetry work. It captures sharp aerial images across a range of light conditions, allowing users to produce detailed, vivid orthomosaics and ultra-accurate 3D digital surface models. It has a 1-inch 20 megapixel RGB sensor that provides ground resolution of 2.9 centimeters per pixel flying at 400 feet (122 meters) above ground level. It has built-in dust and shock protection, enabling mapping across challenging terrain.

    senseFly, www.sensefly.com

  • Lane-level positioning with low-cost map-aided GNSS/MEMS IMU integration

    Lane-level positioning with low-cost map-aided GNSS/MEMS IMU integration

    Lane errors in a three-lane road, giving lane determination (yellow triangle). (Photo: Pavel Vinnik/Shutterstock.com)
    Lane errors in a three-lane road, giving lane determination (yellow triangle). (Photo: Pavel Vinnik/Shutterstock.com)

    A lane-keeping system uses a sensor-fusion engine integrating GPS and an IMU with a two-stage map-matching algorithm. The system does not require explicit lane-level geo-referencing, saving massive storage required for lane-level spatial reference information, and reduces the computational complexity of the map-matching algorithm.

    By Mohamed M. Atia, Carleton University and Allaa Hilal, Intelligent Mechatronics Systems

    Lane determination is an important feature of advanced automotive navigation and guidance systems. It can be used in advanced driving assistance systems (ADAS), lane-departure warnings, and self-driving cars to perform lane-level, turn-by-turn guidance and control. It is also valuable information for telematics applications such as usage-based insurance. Lane-estimation systems have been dominated by vision and infrared sensors. Light detection and ranging (lidar) has also been used as a lane-determination technique. Those systems depend on visually recognizable features and landmarks that may not be available in some areas due to weather conditions or unstructured environments.

    In addition, visual data processing may need specialized accelerators and parallel computing platforms to satisfy real-time constraints. To explore other alternatives, several research projects have started to investigate the feasibility of using low-cost global positioning and navigation technologies such as GPS, micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) inertial measurement units (IMU) and geographical information systems (GIS) as an alternate lane-determination technology. However, most current systems have two main drawbacks: they use high-end RTK GPS, which suffers from coverage issues, and they use explicit lane geo-referencing, which leads to increased storage and processing.

    Here we investigate the feasibility of using standard GPS fused with low-cost MEMS-IMU and a road network that includes lane information but not explicitly storing geo-referenced lane-level links.

    The accuracy of Standard Positioning Service (SPS) GPS is within 3.351 meters (m) with a 95 percent confidence level. Figure 1 shows the results of standard single-point positioning test for a stationary receiver.

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 1. Standard GPS 2D position accuracy in a stationary test. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    The standard lane width in North America is approximately 3.6 m, requiring an unbiased precise positioning solution of much less than 1.8 m. If a safety margin of 50% is considered, unbiased precise positioning of less than 0.9 m is needed. Therefore, a standard SPS GPS technology may not be precise enough to accurately determine the vehicle’s lane. Advanced precise positioning technology like differential GPS (DGPS) can be used with high-resolution lane-level maps to achieve the lane determination.

    However, these techniques may require additional cost/infrastructures and extra processing. To target a lower cost lane-determination system, this work suggests the fusion of measurements from a standard GPS, MEMS IMU and road-level network.

    The work includes a sensor-fusion engine that is developed to integrate GPS and IMU using a loosely coupled extended Kalman filter (EKF). Then, a two-stage map-matching algorithm using a Hidden-Markov-Model (HMM) and a least-squares (LS) regression is developed.

    The system does not require explicit lane-level geo-referencing; consequently, it saves massive storage required to save explicit lane-level spatial reference information, and it reduces the computational complexity of the HMM algorithm by reducing the number of road segments the HMM needs to decode. The overall system is illustrated in Figure 2.

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 2. Illustration of the proposed system. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    PROBLEM DEFINITION

    A geometric illustration of the problem is shown in Figure 3. The road-network map is represented as a set of connected segments. Each road segment is defined by a straight line segment with a start position and end position. Curved roads are approximated by a sufficiently large number of straight line segments. Based on this notation and geometric illustration, the estimation problem that this article is addressing is the determination of the lane on which the vehicle is moving.

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 3. Illustration of the lane determination problem. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    Map-Matching with Hidden-Markov Model. The simplest map-matching method, point-to-curve-matching, is performed by searching for the nearest road segments within a threshold from the current vehicle’s position. The distance is calculated between the vehicle’s position and its projection on the map segment. However, this approach is sensitive to state estimation errors, and it fails at intersections, joins, branches or dense parallel roads. For example, Figure 4 shows a situation where biased GNSS position measurements exist, and the wrong map segment is selected because of the pure dependence on the distance metric only (for instance, D1 is less than D2).

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 4. Wrong map-segment selection in intersection. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    To avoid these errors and to improve map-matching accuracy, the matching criteria must include several constraints such as map topology (connectivity), vehicle dynamics, road geometry and legal direction of motions. In this work, to consider these constraints, we keep a recent portion of the vehicle motion history and use it in the matching criteria. This strategy is known as curve-to-curve matching.

    To process a noisy stream of data, the HMM algorithm is used. A Markov model is a stochastic model that describes a sequence of states. The transition from one state to another can be modeled by a conditional transition probability.

    If the states are not directly observable (hidden) but can be indirectly observed through a sequence of outputs, the process is called a Hidden Markov Process. The HMM in this case is characterized by the transition probability and an emission probability that represents the probability that a given state generates a certain observable.

    Both transition probability and emission probability constitute the Bayesian network of HMM. A fundamental problem of HMM is that, given a sequence of outputs, what is the best sequence of states that explains the observed outputs? This problem is solved by selecting the sequence of states that maximize the HMM probability.

    This estimation process, called decoding, is solved using the Viterbi algorithm. In the proposed system, the hidden states represent map links, and the observable outputs are the vehicle poses. To develop a robust map-matching framework, the vehicle pose history, roads geometry, and map topology constraints must be considered. Therefore, the emission and transition probabilities of an HMM are formulated such that they reflect all of these constraints. The Bayesian network of the HMM for our system is shown in Figure 5. The vehicle states (poses) is obtained from the INS/GNSS filter described shortly.

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 5. Hidden Markov model for vehicle’s state map-matching. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    In the proposed work, the length of the processed buffer of the vehicle’s state is determined based on the traveled distance. The aim is to accumulate a reasonable geometric knowledge about the trajectory segment that enables the HMM to accumulate enough geometric and topological constraints to be able to select the correct sequence of road segments in difficult intersections, joins and exit/entry roads.

    EKF GNSS/INS SYSTEM

    The navigation problem can be modeled as a dynamic system of states vector x(t) as follows:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (1)
    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (2)

    (Figures: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    where f(.) is a nonlinear dynamic model, w(t) is a stochastic system noise vector, u(t) is a control signal vector that triggers the transition from current state to a future state, y(t) is external measurements vector (observables), h(.) is a nonlinear measurement model and v(t) is a stochastic measurement noise vector. Using first-order Taylor series approximation, (1) and (2) can be linearized as follows:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (3)
    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (4)

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (5)

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (6)

    (Figures: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    A Kalman filter calculates an optimal estimation of provided that w(t) and v(t) are zero-mean Gaussian noise vectors with covariance matrices defined by:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (7)

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (8)

    and δx is the error vector with zero-mean and a covariance matrix P defined by:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (9)

    Using zero-hold discretization where derivative is approximated by:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (10)

    where T is the sampling time, equations involving HMM probability can be written in discrete form as follows:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)(11)

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)(12)

    The optimal estimation of the error vector, δxk, given measurements, yk, is calculated using two steps: prediction,

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (13)

     (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal) (14)

    and update,

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)(15)

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)(16)

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)(17)

    (Figures: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    In INS/GNSS systems, the dynamic system state transition (x(t)) is triggered by IMU sensors (accelerometer and gyroscopes) while GNSS measurements are used as observables (y(t)). The observables update in our case is GNSS position and velocity. Therefore, the measurement error model is defined as follows:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)(18)

    where H is defined as follows:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)(19)

    Lane Estimation. When the road segments have been accurately selected based on the filtered vehicle’s pose, the projection of the vehicle’s positions on segment lanes can be easily calculated knowing the lane widths and number of lanes. The sum of squared errors for each lane is then calculated by:

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)(20)

    where N is number of epochs, and pv is the projection of vehicle’s position on lane. The lane associated with the minimum error is selected as the designated lane.

    (Figures: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    Lane-Change Detection. If a lane change occurred within the processed buffer of data, the least-squares regression will not converge to the correct lane. Therefore, the buffer needs to be partitioned at the lane-switch locations. Thus, a lane-change detection module is developed. In this work, a lane-change detection method is designed based on capturing the patterns of the vehicle’s orientation and raw gyroscope measurements. The heading and raw gyroscope measurements during lane changes are shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7.

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 6. Vehicle’s heading during lane change to left. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 7. Vehicle’s gyroscope measurements during lane change to left. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    The general pattern that the lane-change module detects is a peak or a valley in azimuth accompanied by a peak/valley or valley/peak sequence in the gyroscope measurements. To detect peaks and valleys, the standard deviation of a moving window of data is calculated and compared to a peak/valley threshold. If both gyro and azimuth peak/valley sequence are consistent and matched with the pattern described above, a lane change is declared.

    Two algorithm phases of processing are then applied:

    Acquisition Phase. GNSS and IMU measurements are fused in the main EKF, and HMM map-matching is performed and a lane is estimated. The innovation sequence of the main EKF, which is the difference between the predicted state and GNSS updates, is calculated over a buffer of data. If the innovation sequence is within a small threshold and no lane change has been detected, the acquisition phase is concluded and the tracking phase begins.

    Tracking Phase. Two EKF filters are initiated. One EKF accepts position updates from the projection of the vehicle’s position on the selected lane, and the other EKF accepts GNSS position updates only. A discrepancy measure is evaluated between the two EKF instances for a short window of time. If this discrepancy measure is higher than a threshold, a temporary GNSS deviation is assumed and the system keeps reporting the current lane as the designated lane. If GNSS measurements started to be centered again on the new lane, a lane change is confirmed and the output of the first EKF instance will be the correct state. Otherwise, this lane change is declared as false and the second EKF output is the correct output. The overall block diagram of the proposed system is shown in Figure 8.

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 8. Overall block diagram of the proposed system. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    TESTS AND RESULTS

    The proposed system has been tested on a computer connected to a GNSS receiver and an automotive MEMS-grade IMU, and road-network map data. A GPS-enabled camera was installed to capture video of the experiment, to be used as a ground truth to verify the results of our algorithms. Sensor specifications are given in Table 1 and Table 2. The effect of level arm (distance between IMU and GNSS antenna) was not considered in this implementation.

    (Table: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    TABLE 1. GNSS receiver accuracy. (Table: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    (Table: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    TABLE 2. IMU specifications. (Table: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    Three testing trajectories were collected during July 2015 through Highway 400 from Wilson Avenue in the south to Davis Drive in the north. Approximately 65 kilometers of trip data was collected. The data included some urban areas but was mostly open sky. It also included challenging road intersections and road joining/branching points. The experimental setup was designed such that the system automatically started when the vehicle’s engine was turned on. A Linux OS was installed on the gigabyte computer box, and a data acquisition firmware was configured to automatically begin when the computer starts. Measurements from the GNSS receiver at 1 Hz and the IMU at 50 Hz were synchronized on the computer. The main algorithm including GNSS/INS fusion and map-matching was developed in native ANSI C language for efficient processing. Original raw IMU data was set to 50 Hz down-sampled to 5 Hz. Within this interval, the real-time system could fetch map information from a cached database file, perform basic prediction steps and implement the forward calculation of a Viterbi algorithm (including calculation of emission and transition probabilities) that is needed for the HMM map-matching step.

    Lane-Determination Results. The lane estimation results were logged and time-tagged. Using the video recording, the ground truth lane-level solution was visually inspected and manually recorded in a file. Since both the video camera and the proposed INS/GNSS/maps systems log data tagged by GPS time, synchronization between ground truth and the estimated lane were possible. The estimated lanes were visually inspected record by record and results were saved in an Excel sheet. The results were written into a time-tagged file where each row can be easily visually inspected by looking at the portion of images corresponding to the same time-tag. The time-tag used was the UTC-time contained in the NMEA GNSS raw measurements. The overall accuracy of the proposed system in lane determination is shown in Table 3.

    (Table: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    TABLE 3. Lane-estimation accuracy. (Table: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    Figure 9 and Figure 10 show example snapshots of the visual inspection software tool developed to evaluate the accuracy of the system. As can be seen in the figures, an image of the road that indicates the correct lane is displayed in the upper graph, while the estimated lane information is displayed along with road information including lane errors in the lower graph. Figure 10 shows that the system can identify the correct lane when the number of lanes is increased.

    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 9. Lane errors in a three-lane road. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)
    FIGURE 10. Lane errors in a four-lane road. (Figure: Mohamed M. Atia and Allaa Hilal)

    CONCLUSION

    This work described a low-cost lane-level positioning system using a conventional GNSS receiver, MEMS IMUand commercially available road-level network without the need for explicit spatial storage of lanes. The research used a conventional GNSS receiver and MEMS IMU with a computationally efficient two-stage HMM-based map-matching algorithm that avoids the explicit use of lanes as hidden states, which significantly reduces the size of the HMM network and consequently enhance its real-time performance. The proposed system provides an alternative lane determination method without the need for computationally expensive vision/lidar methods that may fail in dark, foggy or dynamically changing environments. The work showed extensive experiments under different road sections, showing an average lane-determination accuracy of 97.14%.

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    This work was first presented at ION International Technical Meeting, January 2018.

    MANUFACTURERS

    The system comprises an Intel Celeron N2807 1.58-GHz Mini PC connected to a u-blox EVK-7P kit GNSS receiver and an automotive MEMS-grade IMU 3D space sensor IMU from YOST Labs, and road-network map data from HERE. A GPS-enabled HP f310 car camcorder captured video.


    MOHAMED M. ATIA received a Ph.D. in electrical and computer engineering from Queen’s University at Kingston. He is assistant professor and founder/director of the Embedded Multi-sensor Systems research laboratory in Carleton University, Ontario, Canada.

    ALLAA HILAL received a Ph.D. degree in electrical and computer Engineering from the University of Waterloo. She is director of the innovation and emerging technology department at Intelligent Mechatronic Systems, a connected-car company based in Waterloo, Canada.

  • KVH and VectorNav collaborate to offer precision inertial navigation system

    KVH and VectorNav collaborate to offer precision inertial navigation system

    VectorNav’s Tactical Series line of inertial navigation systems now supports KVH’s high-performance fiber optic gyro-based 1750 IMU and 1775 IMU.

    Inertial sensor companies KVH Industries Inc. and VectorNav Technologies LLC have announced that KVH’s fiber optic gyro (FOG)-based 1750 IMU and 1775 IMU will now be offered to enhance the operation of VectorNav’s VN-210 and VN-310 Tactical Series GNSS-aided inertial navigation systems.

    The products are on display in KVH’s (#2600) and VectorNav’s (#2214) booths at the AUVSI Xponential conference in Denver, Colorado, taking place April 30-May 3.

    The VectorNav Tactical Series products with KVH’s FOG-based inertial measurement units (IMUs) combine the precision and reliability of KVH’s FOG technology with the robust filters and high-performance navigation algorithms of VectorNav’s inertial navigation systems.

    The combined capabilities represent an affordable, effective alternative to larger, higher-cost inertial navigation systems and provide improved accuracy in challenging environments, the companies said.

    Photo: VectorNav/KVH
    Photo: VectorNav/KVH

    VectorNav’s Tactical Series includes an onboard micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS)-based IMU, which provides some advantages for customers who have constraints in terms of size and weight in their navigation and stabilization applications.

    However, in terms of inertial accuracy, the most demanding applications require performance that can only be delivered by FOG-based IMUs, for which KVH is a leading provider.

    The VectorNav Tactical Series products with KVH FOG-based IMUs are designed for such applications as:

    • Satcom On The Move
    • gimbal and camera pointing and stabilization
    • weapons systems targeting and stabilization
    • autonomous vehicle navigation
    • lidar mapping
    • georeferencing

    or any application where MEMS-based solutions are unable to deliver sufficient accuracy and precision.


    Watch this video from Xponential 2018 to learn more about the partnership.


    A single cable connects the two systems, running from KVH’s 1750 IMU or 1775 IMU directly to the auxiliary port on the VN-210 or VN-310. This pairing creates a fully integrated FOG-based inertial navigation system designed to provide a high-accuracy, continuous positioning, velocity, and attitude solution.

    KVH is a leading innovator for assured navigation and autonomous accuracy using high-performance sensors and integrated inertial systems. KVH’s widely fielded TACNAV systems are in use by the U.S. Army and Marine Corps as well as many allied militaries around the world.

    KVH’s FOGs and FOG-based IMUs are in use today in a wide variety of applications ranging from optical, antenna, and sensor stabilization systems to mobile mapping solutions and autonomous platforms and cars.

    “We are pleased to feature KVH technology in our Tactical Series and give our customers the option of utilizing a FOG-based IMU for higher precision performance to support a wide range of demanding applications,” said Jakub Maslikowski, director of sales and marketing for VectorNav.

    “The combination of VectorNav’s Tactical Series products with our FOG-based IMUs provides a great solution for applications that require advanced inertial navigation capability and FOG-level IMU performance,” said Jay Napoli, vice president of FOG/OEM sales for KVH.

  • Septentrio AsteRx-i provides IMU-enhanced GNSS positioning

    Septentrio AsteRx-i provides IMU-enhanced GNSS positioning

    GNSS receiver manufacturer Septentrio has launched the next-generation AsteRx-i at the IEEE/ION Position Location and Navigation Symposium in Monterey, California.

    The AsteRx-i combines Septentrio’s latest compact, multi-frequency multi-constellation GNSS engine with an external industrial-grade MEMS-based inertial measurement unit (IMU). It can deliver accurate and reliable GNSS/IMU integrated positioning to the centimeter level as well as full 3D attitude at high update rates and low latency.

    Key benefits for users:

    • IMU-enhanced GNSS positioning with full attitude: heading pitch and roll
    • Quad-constellation, multi-frequency, all-in-view real-time kinematic (RTK) receiver
    • AIM+ interference monitoring and mitigation system
    • High-update rate, low-latency positioning and attitude

    Designed around demanding requirements for size, weight and power consumption, the AsteRx-i is suitable for optical inspection and photogrammetry.

    Accompanied by a UAS-tailored carrier board, the AsteRx-i integrates seamlessly into light UAVs. The versatility of design and range of connection interfaces extend the AsteRx-i applicability to automation and robotics and as well as logistics.

    The AsteRx-i includes Septentrio’s GNSS+ suite of positioning algorithms to convert difficult environments into good positioning: LOCK+ technology to maintain tracking during heavy vibration, APME+ to combat multipath and IONO+ technology to ensure continued position accuracy during periods of elevated ionospheric activity.

    It also features AIM+ interference mitigation and monitoring system which can suppress the widest variety of interferers, from simple continuous narrowband signals to the most complex wideband and pulsed jammers.

    “Complementing our GNSS portfolio with an INS offering is a natural evolution of our product range. At Septentrio, we design our GNSS solutions with a focus on reliability and availability. Smart integration of inertial sensors builds on these strengths to make affordable high-precision positioning and orientation solutions possible for ever more demanding applications,” said Francesca Clemente, product manager at Septentrio.

  • Analog Devices provides IMUs for autonomy

    Analog Devices has produced a series of five high-performance inertial measurement units (IMUs) for industrial applications that address the navigation- and safety-related needs of industrial applications in several emerging markets, while also reducing their system complexity and cost.

    The IMUs provide six-degree-of-freedom (DoF) sensing via triple-axis MEMS-based accelerometers and gyroscopes, and are focused on the demands of the industrial “internet of moving things” and its need for precise geolocation.

    The ADIS16470, ADIS16475 and ADIS16477 IMUs have standard surface mount assembly. The three models are optimized to provide a range of performance, cost and application-suitability needs.

    The ADIS16465 and ADIS16467 IMUs offer similar performance advantages in a more ruggedized enclosure option.

    Together, the products bring a previously unavailable performance-for-cost ratio to unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) applications where designers have previously struggled with costly, risky and sub-par performance solutions from integrating consumer-grade sensors, which also fell short of reliability goals.

    These new IMUs bring the same benefits to autonomous machine applications in fields such as smart agriculture, where the demands of such rugged equipment previously forced a choice between cost-challenged, highest-grade sensors or performance-limited commercial sensors.

    All of the IMUs provide six degree-of-freedom (DoF) sensing via triple-axis MEMS-based accelerometers and gyroscopes, and are focused on the demands of the industrial “Internet of Moving Things” and its need for precise geolocation. Their performance allows systems to characterize motion accurately despite turbulence, vibration, wind, temperature and other environmental disturbances, resulting in more accurate navigation and guidance and instrument stabilization.

    The ADIS1646x and ADIS1647x IMUs are specifically designed to reject what are otherwise significant error sources, such as ‘g’-influence, cross-axis sensitivity and temperature and mechanical stress-related drifts.

  • MEMS and wireless options: User localization in cellular phones

    MEMS and wireless options: User localization in cellular phones

    Integrations of MEMS sensors with signal conditioning and radio communications form “motes” with extremely low-cost and low-power requirements and miniaturized form factor. Now standard features in modern mobile devices, MEMS accelerometers and gyros can be combined with absolute positioning technologies, such as GNSS or other wireless technologies, for user localization.

    Navigation has been revolutionized by micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) sensor development, offering new capabilities for wireless positioning technologies and their integration into modern smartphones.

    These new technologies range from simple IrDA using infrared light for short-range, point-to-point communications, to wireless personal area network (WPAN) for short range, point-to multi-point communications, such as Bluetooth and ZigBee, to mid-range, multi-hop wireless local area network (WLAN, also known as wireless fidelity or Wi-Fi), to long-distance cellular phone systems, such as GSM/GPRS and CDMA.

    With these technologies, navigation itself has become much broader than just providing a solution to location-based services (LBS) questions, such as “Where am I?” or “How to get from start point to destination?”

    It has moved into new areas such as games, geolocation, mobile mapping, virtual reality, tracking, health monitoring and context awareness.

    MEMS sensors are now essential components of modern smartphones and tablets. Miniaturized devices and structures produced with micro-fabrication techniques, their physical dimensions range from less than 1 micrometer (μm, a millionth of a meter) to several millimeters (mm).

    The types of MEMS devices vary from relatively simple structures having no moving elements to complex electromechanical systems with multiple moving elements under the control of integrated microelectronics.

    Apart from size reduction, MEMS technology offers other benefits such as batch production and cost reduction, power (voltage) reduction, ruggedization and design flexibility, within limits.

    Wireless sensor technology allows MEMS sensors to be integrated with signal-conditioning and radio units to form “motes” with extremely low cost, small size and low power requirements.

    New miniaturized sensors and actuators based on MEMS are available on the market or in the development stage.

    Today’s smartphone sensors can include MEMS-based accelerometers, microphones, gyroscopes, temperature and humidity sensors, light sensors, proximity and touch sensors, image sensors, magnetometers, barometric pressure sensors and capacitive fingerprint sensors, all integrated to wireless sensor nodes.

    These sensors were not initially intended for navigation. For instance, accelerometers are used primarily for applications such as switching the display from landscape to portrait as well as gaming.

    These embedded sensors, however, are natural candidates for sensing user context. Because of their locating capabilities, people are getting used to the location-enabled life.

    MEMS accelerometers and gyros, for instance, can be employed for localization in combination with absolute positioning technologies, such as GNSS or other wireless technologies.

    WIRELESS OPTIONS IN SMARTPHONES

    Various wireless standards have been established. Among them, the standards for Wi-Fi, IEEE 802.11b and wireless PAN, IEEE 802.15.1 (Bluetooth) and IEEE 802.15.4 (ZigBee) are used more widely for measurement and automation applications.

    All these standards use the instrumentation, scientific and medical (ISM) radio bands, including the sub-GHz bands of 902–928 MHz (US), 868–870 MHz (Europe), 433.05–434.79 MHz (US and Europe) and 314–316 MHz (Japan) and the GHz bands of 2.4000-2.4835 GHz (worldwide acceptable).

    In general, a lower frequency allows a longer transmission range and a stronger capability to penetrate through walls and glass.

    However, due to the fact that radio waves with lower frequencies are more easily absorbed by materials, such as water and trees, and that radio waves with higher frequencies are easier to scatter, effective transmission distance for signals carried by a high-frequency radio wave may not necessarily be shorter than that of a lower frequency carrier at the same power rating.

    The 2.4-GHz band has a wider bandwidth that allows more channels and frequency hopping and permits compact antennas.

    Wireless Fidelity. Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11) is a flexible data communication protocol implemented to extend or substitute for a wired local area network, such as Ethernet. The bandwidth of 802.11b is 11 Mbits and it operates at 2.4 GHz frequency.

    Originally a technology for short-range wireless data communication, it is typically deployed as an ad-hoc network in a hot-spot. Wireless networks are built by attaching an access point (AP) to the edge of a wired network.

    Clients communicate with the AP using a wireless network adapter similar to an Ethernet adapter. Beacon frames are transmitted in IEEE 802.11 Wi-Fi for network identification, broadcasting network capabilities, synchronization and other control and management purposes.

    Timers of all terminals are synchronized to the AP clock by the timestamp information of the beacon frames. The IEEE 802.11 MAC (Media Access Control) protocol utilizes carrier sensing contention based on energy detection or signal quality.

    RSSs and MAC addresses of the APs are location-dependent information that can be adopted for positioning. For localization of a mobile device, either cell-based solutions or (tri)lateration and location fingerprinting are commonly employed.

    Bluetooth. A wireless protocol for short-range communication, Bluetooth (IEEE 802.15.1) uses the 2.4-Hz, 915-MHz and 868-MHz ISM radio bands to communicate at 1 Mbit between up to eight devices. It is mainly designed to maximize the ad-hoc networking functionality (Wang et al., 2006).

    Compared to Wi-Fi, the gross bit rate is lower (1 Mbps), and the range is shorter (typically around 10 m). On the other hand, Bluetooth is a “lighter” standard, highly ubiquitous (embedded in most phones) and supports several other networking services in addition to IP. For positioning either tags (small size transceivers) or Bluetooth low energy (BLE) iBeacons are common.

    Each tag has a unique ID that can be used for localization. iBeacon is a low-energy protocol developed by Apple; compatible hardware transmitters, typically so-called beacons, broadcast their identifier to nearby portable electronic devices.

    The technology enables smartphones, tablets and other devices to perform actions when in close proximity to an iBeacon whereby a universally unique identifier picked up by a compatible app or operating system is transmitted.

    The identifier and several bytes sent with it can be used to determine the device’s physical location, track customers, or trigger an LBS action on the device such as a check-in on social media or a push notification.

    One application is distributing messages at a specific point of interest — for example, a store, a bus stop, a room or a more specific location like a piece of furniture or a vending machine. This is similar to previously used geopush technology based on GNSS, but with a much reduced impact on battery life and much extended precision.

    Another application is an indoor positioning system, which helps smartphones determine their approximate location or context. With the help of an iBeacon, a smartphone’s software can approximately find its relative location to an iBeacon.

    iBeacon differs from some other LBS technologies as the broadcasting device (beacon) is only a one-way transmitter to the receiving smartphone, and necessitates a specific app installed on the device to interact with the beacons.

    This ensures that only the installed app (not the iBeacon transmitter) can track users, potentially against their will, as they passively walk around the transmitters. Localization is based on proximity sensing and cell-based solutions.

    ZigBee. ZigBee is an IEEE 802.15.4-based specification for a suite of high-level communication protocols used to create personal area networks with small, low-power digital radios.

    ZigBee operates in the ISM radio bands: 2.4 GHz in most jurisdictions worldwide, 784 MHz in China, 868 MHz in Europe and 915 MHz in the U.S. and Australia. Data rates vary from 20 kbit/s (868-MHz band) to 250 kbit/s (2.4-GHz band).

    It adds network, security and application software and is intended to be simpler and less expensive than other WPANs such as Bluetooth or Wi-Fi.

    Owing to its low power consumption and simple networking configuration, ZigBee is best suited for intermittent data transmissions from a sensor or input device.

    Applications include wireless light switches, electrical meters with in-home displays, traffic management systems and other consumer and industrial equipment that requires short-range low-rate wireless data transfer.

    Distances are limited to 10–100 m line-of-sight, depending on power output and environmental characteristics. ZigBee localization techniques usually use measurement of signal strength (RSS-based positioning) in conjunction with (tri)lateration and fingerprinting.

    COMPARING STANDARDS

    Table 1 compares the three wireless standards most suitable for a wireless sensor network. The standards also address the network issues for wireless sensors. Three types of networks (star, hybrid and mesh) have been developed and standardized.

    TABLE 1. Comparison of Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and ZigBee.

    Bluetooth uses star networks, composed of piconets and scatternets. Each piconet connects one master node with up to seven slave nodes, whereas each scatternet connects multiple piconets, to form an ad-hoc network. ZigBee uses hybrid star networks of multiple master nodes with routing capabilities to connect slave nodes, which have no routing capability.

    The most efficient networking technology uses peer-to-peer mesh networks, which allow all the nodes in the network to have routing capability. Mesh networks allow autonomous nodes to self-assemble into the network and allow sensor information to propagate across the network with high reliability and over an extended range.

    They also allow time synchronization and low power consumption for the “listeners” in the network, thus extending battery life. When a large number of wireless sensors need to be networked, several levels of networking may be combined.

    For example, an IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi) mesh network comprised of high-end nodes, such as gateway units, can be overlaid on a ZigBee sensor network to maintain a high level of network performance.

    A remote application server (RAS) can also be deployed in the field close to a localized sensor network to manage the network, to collect localized data, to host web-based applications, to remotely access the cellular network via a GSM/GPRS or a CDMA-based modem and, in turn, to access the internet and remote users.

    ESTIMATION METHODS

    The three most common position estimation methods are cell-based positioning (cell-of-origin, CoO), (tri) lateration and location fingerprinting, regarding achievable positioning accuracies as well as their advantages and disadvantages.

    They provide different level of accuracies ranging from dm up to tens of m. Compared to (tri)lateration and fingerprinting, the principle of operation of CoO is the most straightforward and simplest. Disadvantages range from the requirement of a large number of devices or receivers as well as their performance in dynamic environments.

    All these techniques provide absolute localization capabilities. Their disadvantage is that position fixes are lost if no coverage or signal availability is available.

    Thus, combination with other technologies to bridge loss of lock of wireless signals (for example, no GNSS reception) is required. In smartphones, motion sensors exists that can be employed for inertial navigation (IN). In this article, these sensors are also referred to as inertial sensors.

    In the simplest case, a position solution can be obtained from the relative measurements of the inertial sensors via dead reckoning (DR). The accelerometers, for instance, can be used by a pedestrian to count steps while walking and the gyroscope and magnetometer can provide the direction of movement.

    These sensors have therefore substantially won on importance for navigation solutions.

    MEMS LOCATION SENSORS

    For many navigation applications, improved accuracy and performance is not necessarily the most important issue, but meeting performance at reduced cost and size is.

    In particular, small navigation sensor size allows the introduction of guidance, navigation and control into applications previously considered out of reach. In this context, the small size, extreme ruggedness and potential for very low-cost and weight means of MEMS gyros and accelerometers have been, and will be, able to utilize inertial guidance systems — a situation that was unthinkable before MEMS.

    The reduction in size of the sensing elements, however, creates challenges for attaining good performance. In general, the performance of MEMS inertial measurement units (IMUs) continues to be limited by gyro performance, which is typically around 10 to 30 deg/h, rather than by accelerometer performance, which has demonstrated tens of micro-g or better.

    MEMS has struggled to reach high-accuracy tactical-grade quality.

    MEMS Accelerometors. MEMS accelerometers are either pendulous/displacement mass type or resonator type. The former use closed-loop capacitive sensing and electrostatic forcing while the latter are based on resonance operation.

    Both can detect acceleration in two primary ways: either displacement of a hinged or flexure-supported proof mass under acceleration, producing a change in a capacitive or piezoelectric readout, or frequency change of a vibrating element caused by a change in its tension induced by a change of loading from a seismic-proof mass.

    Pendulous types can meet a wide performance range from 1 mg for tactical systems down to 25 μg. Resonant accelerometers or VBAs can reach higher performance down to 1 μg.

    MEMS-Based Gyroscopes. For MEMS INS, attaining suitable gyro performance is more difficult to achieve than accelerometer performance. Fundamentally, MEMS gyros fall into four major areas: vibrating beams, vibrating plates, ring resonators and dithered accelerometers.

    Gyroscopes are usually built as hybrid solutions, with sensor and electronics as two separate chips. The operational principle for all vibratory gyroscopes is based on the utilization of the Coriolis force.

    If a mass is vibrated sinusoidally in a plane, and that plane is rotated at some angular rate Ω, then the Coriolis force causes the mass to vibrate sinusoidally perpendicular to the frame with amplitude proportional to the angular rate Ω.

    Measurement of the Coriolis-induced motion provides knowledge of the angular rate Ω. This rate measurement is the underlying principle of all quartz and silicon micro-machined.

    These gyroscopes are usually designed as an electronically driven resonator, which are often fabricated out of a single piece of quartz or silicon. The output is demodulated, amplified and digitized. Their extremely small size, combined with the strength of silicon, makes them ideal for very high-acceleration applications.

    For purely surface micro-mechanical gyroscopes, given their small sizes and capacitances, monolithic integration is an option to be considered not so much for cost as for performance.

    Combined IMUs. Further interest in all-accelerometer systems, which are also referred to as gyro-free, arises because high-performing small gyroscopes are very difficult to produce. Two approaches are typically used. In the first, the Coriolis effect is utilized.

    Typically, three opposing pairs of monolithic MEMS accelerometers are dithered on a vibrating structure (or rotated). This approach allows the detection of the angular rate Ω. In the second, the accelerometers are placed in fixed locations and used to measure angular acceleration.

    In both approaches, the accelerometers also measure linear acceleration, enabling a full navigation solution. In the direct approach, however, the need to make one more integration step makes it more vulnerable to bias variations and noise, so the output errors grow by an order of magnitude faster over time than when using a conventional IMU.

    However, these devices only provide tactical-grade performance, and are most useful in GNSS-aided applications. The concept of a navigation-grade all-accelerometer IMU requires accelerometers with accuracies on the order of nano-g’s or better, and with large separation distances.

    Use of all-accelerometer navigation for GNSS-unavailable environments will likely require augmentation with other absolute positioning techniques. Further sensor size reductions are underway through the combination of two in-plane (x- and y-axis) and one out-of- plane (z-axis) sensors on one chip. These multi-axes gyroscopes and accelerometer chips produce IMUs as small as 0.2 cm3.

    Barometric Sensors. Barometric pressure sensors embedded in smartphones and other mobile devices demand small size, low cost and high-accuracy performance. The key element of a pressure sensor is a diaphragm containing piezoresistors which can be formed by ion implantation or in-diffusion.

    Applied pressure deflects the diaphragm and thereby changes the resistance of the piezoresistors. By arranging the piezoresistors in a Wheatstone bridge, an output signal voltage can be generated. The measurement sensitivity of the pressure sensor is determined by the strain at the bottom plane of the diaphragm, whereby larger strain leads to higher sensitivity.

    These altimeters are increasingly used in smartphones and other navigation systems. They can enable altitude determination of the user, for example, to determine the correct floor in a multi-storey building.

    Pedestrian Dead Reckoning (PDR). The MEMS accelerometers embedded in the mobile device can be used to estimate the distance traveled from the accelerations made while walking, and magnetometers and gyroscopes to obtain user heading. Starting from a known position, determined by GNSS or other absolute positioning technique, the current position of the user can then be dead-reckoned using observations of the inertial sensors.

    DR techniques differ from other localization techniques because the position is always calculated relative to the previously calculated position and no correlation with the real position can be made. PDR can give the best available information on position; however, it is subject to significant cumulative errors, i.e., either compounding, multiplicatively or exponentially, due to many factors as both velocity and direction must be accurately known at all instants for position to be determined accurately.

    The accuracy of PDR can be increased significantly by using other, more reliable methods  — GNSS or another absolute positioning technique such as Wi-Fi — the combination with inertial sensors produces more reliable and accurate navigation.

    Altitude Determination. For navigation, determination of the altitude of the user can be of great importance, for example in determining the correct floor in a multi-storey building. Barometric pressure sensors can provide this data, augmenting the inertial sensors that can usually only provide reliable 2D localization.

    Furthermore, if only three GNSS satellites are visible, providing a 2D positioning solution, pressure sensors can aid 3D localization.

    Altitude determination with a barometric pressure sensor can be performed relatively from a given start height — for example, obtained from GNSS outside the building or from a known height point in the indoor environment.

    As the user walks inside the building and up stairs or elevator to other floors, differences in air pressure can be calculated using a simple relationship between the pressure changes and height differences.

    For conversion of the air pressure in a height difference, the mean value of the temperature at both stations is also required; MEMS infrared temperature sensors are increasingly found in smartphones to provide this.

    Activity Detection. Low-cost inertial and motion sensors provide a new platform for dynamic activity pattern inference. Human activity recognition aims to recognize the motion of a person from a series of observations of the user’s body and environment.

    A single biaxial accelerometer can classify six activities: walking, running, sitting, walking upstairs, walking downstairs and standing.

    Until recently, sensors on the body have been used for activity detection, and until recently only a few studies have used a smartphone to collect data for activity recognition.

    Smartphone accelerometers recognize acceleration in three axes as shown in Figure 1. Different motion sequences can thereby be ascertained.

    Figure 1. Smartphone coordinate frame (left) and global horizontal coordinate system (right).

    If a smartphone is held horizontally in the hand during a forward motion, then an acceleration in the y-axis is induced. When working with accelerations, two approaches can be applied to measure the linear displacement: integration of the accelerations or step detection combined with step size estimate.

    In the first case, the distance traveled can be theoretically calculated by integrating the accelerations once for velocity, twice for distance.

    Due to the double integration, however, any error in the signal will propagate rapidly, so the drift on the received signals from the accelerometer makes it impossible to use integration for walks of more than a few seconds.

    The Zero Velocity Update (ZUPT) technique, where the velocity is reset to zero between every consecutive step when the foot is stationary for a small amount of time, can overcome this. Any error produced during one step has no influence on following steps. ZUPT can only be used when the accelerometer is placed on the foot, taking advantage of the stationary period between footsteps.

    In the latter case, the distance traveled is obtained from step counts by processing the fluctuating vertical accelerations, which cross zero twice with every step. When the number of steps and the step size are acquired, the distance can be calculated by multiplication.

    Figure 2 shows the recorded acceleration of a walking person in the z-axis, with significant maxima and minima that enable step-counting. Correction for the gravity effect on the x-, y- and z-axes of the smartphone’s local coordinate system is key to the correct determination of accelerometer-derived distance traveled. The MEMS-based three-axis accelerometer allows the device to detect the force applied along the three axes in order to accomplish specific functions based on predefined configurations.

    Figure 2 . Typical recording of accelerometer sensor data in z-axis of a walking user.

    The mobile device can be oriented in such that one of the axes is aligned in the direction of movement or heading (for example, y-axis), the positive x-axis is pointing rightward and the positive z-axis is upward (compare Figure 1). When the y-axis is horizontal, the gravity effect will be fully reflected on the z-axis.

    However, a cell phone will most likely be placed by a user into a pocket or bag. Therefore, most existing step detection algorithms cannot be used directly — adjustments have to be made to take into account the orientation of the accelerometers. Because a phone can be placed with any side up or down, the accelerations are observed to determine which axis is the most vertical one.

    The accelerations of the axis that is pointing directly to the center of the Earth has a value of 1 g due to gravity. So if the smartphone is lying flat on a table, with the display side up, then the z-axis of the accelerometer would theoretically have a value of 1,000 mg.

    If the phone is put crooked (not along one of the axes) in someone’s pocket, the values will be lower than 1,000 mg. So to detect which accelerometer has the most vertical axis, the absolute average of the last 30 samples, or 1.2 seconds, of all three axes of the accelerometers of which the absolute value is closest to 1 g, is the most vertical axis and the accelerometer to use.

    SYSTEM COMPARISON

    Table 2 compares the most commonly used location sensors and systems in mobile devices classified depending on their positioning capability — absolute or relative — and on their type. A meaningful combination in form of a hybrid solution will produce the best performance for localization of a mobile smartphone user.

    TABLE 2. Specifications of the most commonly used location sensors and systems in mobile devices.

    Combining MEMS, Wireless. For the majority of indoor navigation systems, the combination of MEMS sensors and wireless options provides the optimal solution. MEMS sensors can provide relative positioning information, with an unbounded accumulation of location errors over time. Wireless systems provide an absolute position in either a local or global coordinate frame, independent of previous estimates without integrating measurements over time. The combination of these two technologies takes advantages of the strengths of both, producing a more robust position solution.

    CONCLUSIONS

    The increasing ubiquity of location-aware devices has pushed the need for robust GNSS-like positioning capabilities in difficult environments.

    No single sensor or technique can meet the positioning requirements for the increasing number of safety- and liability-critical mass-market applications.

    Integration is one approach to improving performance level, but a significant step change in high-performance positioning in GNSS-difficult environments, higher performance level are required from MEMS and wireless technologies.


    ALLISON KEALY is a professor of geospatial science at Royal Melbourne Institute of Technolgy University, Australia. She holds a Ph.D. in GPS and geodesy from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. He is co-chair of FIG Working Group 5.5. Ubiquitous Positioning and vice president of the International Association of Geodesy (IAG) Commission 4: Positioning and Applications.

    GÜNTHER RETSCHER is associate professor in geodesy and geoinformation at the Vienna University of Technology, with a Ph.D. in applied geodesy. He is co-chair of IAG Sub-Commission 4.1 on Emerging Positioning Technologies and GNSS Augmentation and of the IAG/Fig Working Group on Multi-Sensor Systems.

  • Telit introduces Bluetooth module with integrated MEMS

    Telit has launched BlueMod+S42M, a Bluetooth low-energy (BLE) 4.2, standalone, single-mode module with embedded 3-axis accelerometer, temperature and humidity sensors.

    The cost-effective component is optimized for efficiency and simplicity in end-device design and manufacturing, delivering reliable BLE functionality with robust endpoint security, motion and environmental sensors and essential features that reduce development costs, bill of materials, and time to market.

    Designed for large-scale projects, the BlueMod+S42M expedites device design across a wide range of industrial and consumer applications areas, the company said. The embedded sensors are for high-value, fragile asset tracking, and time- or temperature-sensitive applications such as cold chain monitoring in the pharmaceutical and agriculture industries.

    The release of the certified BlueMod+S42M complements the Telit portfolio of Bluetooth and BLE modules and directly addresses the demand in the rapidly growing BLE-dependent market. A report released by IndustryARC Analysis, forecasts Bluetooth Low Energy enabled devices shipments to increase to 8.4 billion units by 2020 at a CAGR of 29 percent.

    “Cost, power, and reliability are critical to the success of IoT applications that demand efficient BLE solutions,” said Ronen Ben-Hamou, Telit EVP of products and solutions. “Our new qualified Bluetooth module caters to designers of all levels with tight development, materials and manufacturing cost constraints and even tighter timelines. The beauty of the +S42M is it’s simplicity: single-chip SoC (system on chip), feature packed, sensibly priced, exceptional power savings and extensive interoperability.”

    Full applications can be embedded in the BlueMod+S42M, which is a self-contained SoC requiring no additional external supporting components. It is equipped with an on-board micro controller, integrated chip antenna, passive components, T°/Humidity sensor, and an accelerometer.

    Leveraging a rich subset of features from Telit’s diverse family of BlueMod+Sx modules, including a GATT interface and terminal I/O profile combination, the new BlueMod+S42M greatly simplifies and accelerates the development of applications, Telit said.

    In addition to efficient performance and low power consumption, BlueMod+S42M includes value-added features that further streamline development:

    • Bluetooth v4.2 Qualified Module
    • RED, SRCC Certified
    • Generic GATT Client and Server
    • LE Secure Connections
    • Configurable DIS (Device Information Service)
    • LE Data Length Extension
    • Terminal I/O for Easy Transparent Data Transfer (BLE- SPP like)
    • Embedded Sensors
    • Over-the-Air Updates
    • Sample Code for iOS and Android
    • WeChat Air Sync Protocol

    Designers using the BlueMod+S42M have access to comprehensive development and integration tools including evaluation and development kits.

    Visit Telit at the Sensors Expo in San Jose, California, June 27-29, booth 1244.

  • Inertial performance: Enhanced tightly coupled dead reckoning

    Inertial performance: Enhanced tightly coupled dead reckoning

    Exploring IMU specifications and correlating them to performance of a final product can be daunting, as differences between MEMS sensors are not always apparent. This article presents achievable performances in fusion technology across a range of IMUs among the best in their respective performance categories. 

    The number of available options in inertial navigation systems (INS) has grown substantially over the last several years. Major advances have been made not only in inertial measurement unit (IMU) technology, but also in the ability to exploit sensor information to its fullest extent. In both cases, the largest impact can be seen in the micro-electrical-mechanical systems (MEMS) sensors. MEMS sensors are typically much smaller, lower power and less expensive than traditional IMUs. The net result of these improvements is a proliferation of INS systems at much lower cost than were previously available and, therefore, greatly increased accessibility to technology that has historically seen limited deployment. Selecting the appropriate sensor and fusion solution for a particular application can be very challenging due to the large and confusing spectrum of solutions.

    The IMUs will be examined in the context of new enhancements to sensor fusion algorithms such as the use of INS profiles. The concept of INS profiles applies environment specific constraints to improve performance in certain types of vehicles, or motion profiles. External sensors such as odometers and dual antenna operation can also aid the solution considerably, but will be unused in this analysis except for occasional comparisons. These external aiding sensors are extremely helpful in many cases and are available to use with a proprietary tightly coupled GNSS+INS solution called SPAN, but this paper seeks to evaluate what performance can be achieved without such aids.

    Real-world test results will be examined using a selection of IMUs with the latest SPAN algorithms to illustrate what kind of performance can be achieved with different sensors in difficult conditions. Despite their major advances over the past few years, there are many challenges involved with utilizing MEMS technology to provide a robust navigation solution, particularly during limited GNSS availability or low dynamics. The measurement error characteristics of these devices have improved dramatically, but are still much larger and more difficult to estimate than traditional sensors. Advancements in SPAN sensor fusion algorithms have enabled these smaller sensors to achieve remarkable performance, especially in applications where environmental conditions allow for additional constraints to be applied.

    This testing focuses on the land profile, meaning the constraints applied to a fixed-axle vehicle. The test scenarios were selected in such a way as to provide results for ideal, poor and completely denied GNSS coverage.

    INS Profiles

    GNSS and IMU sensors are only one part of the overall INS system performance. The sensor fusion algorithms used to exploit the available sensor data to its utmost capability are equally as important. In this regard, several improvements have been made to the SPAN INS algorithms to enhance performance under a variety of scenarios.

    The largest addition to the SPAN product line is the introduction of INS profiles. That is, environment- and vehicle-specific modeling constraints can be utilized to enhance the filter performance. For example, the land profile, which will be examined in depth in this article, is intended for use with ground vehicles that cannot move laterally. The assumptions introduced for land vehicles, however, are not necessarily valid for different forms of movement, such as those experienced by a helicopter. Therefore, profiles have been implemented via command, and controlled as required by the user, allowing for maximum performance depending on the application at hand.

    The land profile is analogous to what has historically been identified as dead reckoning. It is a method that uses a priori knowledge of typical land vehicle motion to help constrain the INS error growth. In other words, it makes assumptions on how land vehicles move to simplify inertial navigation from a six-degree-of-freedom system to something closer to a distance/bearing calculation. The land profile takes the concept of dead reckoning, models it as an update type into the inertial filter and adds a few additional enhancements.

    Velocity Constraints / Dead Reckoning. Amongst other optimizations, the land profile enables velocity constraints based on the assumption of acceptable vehicle dynamics. This includes limiting the cross track and vertical velocities of the vehicle. Of all the enhancements, this is the one most colloquially referred to as dead reckoning.

    In its simplest form, dead reckoning is the propagation of a position without any external input. In this forum, external input generally refers to GNSS satellites. Without external input, dead reckoning is inherently dependent on assumptions of velocity and heading to propagate the position. These solutions have evolved by integrating inertial and directional sensors to provide more local input and improve the solution propagation. This also is not a perfect method, however, as inertial sensors have their own errors that grow exponentially over time. The land profile velocity constraints explain the bulk of optimizations SPAN has made to enable dead-reckoning performance in extended GNSS outage conditions.

    Explaining the velocity updates involves using the current INS attitude (  ); the vehicle attitude (  ) is estimated by applying the measured or estimated IMU body to vehicle direction cosine (  ). From this, the pitch and azimuth for the vehicle is estimated.Using the magnitude of the measured INS velocity in conjunction with the derived vehicle orientation, the vehicle velocity is computed, allowing the expected vertical velocity and cross-track to be constrained.

    A velocity vector update is then applied to the inertial filter to constrain error growth. The effects of this method are expected to be most apparent in extended GNSS outage conditions when the INS solution must propagate with no external update information.

    Phase Windup Attitude Updates. Some applications are inherently difficult for inertial sensors due to the fact that these systems are reliant on measuring accelerations and rotations in order to observe IMU errors. When traveling at a constant bearing and speed, separating IMU errors from measurements becomes challenging, so any application that does not provide meaningful dynamics is more demanding on inertial navigation algorithms. This type of condition commonly appears in applications such as machine control, agriculture and mining.

    Gravity is a strong and fairly well known acceleration signal, so the real difficulty in this type of environment is managing the attitude, and especially azimuth, errors. Attitude parameters become difficult to observe when the system experiences insignificant rotation rates about its vertical axis.

    External inputs can be used for providing input during low dynamic conditions when rotational observations are weaker. These are particularly helpful in constraining angular errors and include the same types used to assist in initial alignment: dual antenna GNSS heading, magnetometers, etc. However, as the goal of this testing is to demonstrate the achievable performance from a single antenna GNSS system, this type of external aid was specifically omitted.

    Utilizing a patented technique for determining relative yaw from phase windup, the system is able to distinguish between true system rotation and unmodeled IMU errors during times of limited motion. This is a novel way to extract additional information out of existing sensors rather than adding more equipment and complexity.

    The phase windup update is used to constrain azimuth error growth during low dynamic conditions that are typically not favorable to inertial navigation. However, it does require uninterrupted GNSS tracking and is therefore applicable only in GNSS benign environments. This approach is expected to show the greatest benefit in low dynamic conditions and be directly attributable to azimuth accuracy, but only in conditions where GNSS availability is relatively secure.

    Equipment and Test Setup

    We paired OEM-grade GNSS receiver cards with a selection of IMUs in different performance categories. Since the OEM GNSS platform is capable of tracking all GNSS constellations and frequencies, we configured each receiver to use triple frequency, quad-constellation RTK positioning. The receivers were coupled with a wideband antenna capable of tracking GPS L1/L2/L5, GLONASS L1/L2, BeiDou B1/B2 and Galileo E1/E5b signals.

    Three IMUs were tested: an entry-level MEMS IMU (UUT1), a tactical-grade MEMS IMU (UUT2) and a high-performance fiber-optic gyro-based IMU (UUT3).

    All GNSS receivers and IMUs were set up in a single test vehicle and collected simultaneously for all scenarios. IMUs were mounted together on a rigid frame, and all receivers ran the same firmware build that were connected to the same antenna.

    The tests were conducted using a single GNSS antenna with no additional augmentation sources, such as distance measurement instrument (DMI) or wheel sensor. These are extremely helpful in aiding the solution, but as previously mentioned, this testing seeks to demonstrate the possible performance without the benefit of additional aiding sources. Dependence on aiding sources is a very important distinction when comparing such systems.

    The GNSS positioning mode used was RTK via an NTRIP feed from a single base station with baselines between 5–30 kilometers. This was done to try to minimize GNSS positioning differences between the three systems. L-band correction signals were not tracked, and PPP positioning modes were not enabled.

    A basic setup diagram of each system under test can be seen in Figure 1.

    FIGURE 1. Equipment set-up (not to scale).

     

    Test Scenarios

    Four test scenarios will be examined using all the equipment and algorithms described above. They are: urban canyon, low dynamics, parking garage and extended GNSS outage.

    The urban canyon test is designed to show the performance of the system in restricted GNSS conditions. The challenge to this scenario is to maintain a high-accuracy solution when GNSS positioning becomes intermittent or even unavailable.

    The low dynamics test is intended to illustrate the benefits of the land profile, and specifically the phase windup azimuth updates in maintaining the azimuth accuracy.

    The parking garage test will show the efficacy of the velocity constraint models over the different IMU classes as the extended outage provides no external information to the INS filter whatsoever. Again, no other aiding sources were used.

    Urban Canyon Test. The urban canyon environment has been and remains one of the strongest arguments in favor of using GNSS/INS fusion in a navigation solution. Because urban canyons are common, densely populated and, of course, a demanding GNSS environment, they represent both an important and challenging location to provide a reliable navigation solution. Typically, they contain major signal obstructions, strong reflectors and complete blockages (depending on the city). For this reason, they provide an excellent use case for INS bridging to maintain stability of the solution.

    During most urban canyon environments, it is typically rare to incur total GNSS outages of more than 30 seconds. Therefore, this scenario examines the stability of the solution in continuously degraded, but not generally absent, GNSS. In this case, the coupling technique of the inertial algorithms rather than quality of the IMU dominates achievable position accuracy.

    The receiver platform is capable of tracking all GNSS constellations and frequencies. This provides a significant benefit to test scenarios, such as the urban canyon, where the amount of visible sky is significantly restricted. In this case, the more satellites that are observable, the more the tightly coupled architecture can exploit the partial GNSS information.

    Though position accuracy between IMUs is less apparent in this condition, attitude results remain separated by IMU quality, which is a major consideration for some mapping applications such as those using lidar or other sensors where a distance/bearing calculation must be done for distant targets.

    Test data for this scenario was collected in downtown Calgary, Canada. The trajectory (Figure 2) includes several overhead bridges for brief total outages and some very dense urban conditions.

    FIGURE 2. Urban canyon test trajectory.

    Table 1 shows the RMS error results of the three systems running both the default and land profiles. The first thing to notice is that the errors are differentiated by IMU category, though the differences are fairly small in the position domain thanks to the tightly coupled architecture. However, because GNSS information is partially available, the differences seen in activating the land profile are fairly modest, especially as the IMU performance rises.

    TABLE 1. RTK RMS errors for urban canyon.

    As the clearest benefits of the land profile are seen on the entry-level MEMS IMU (UUT1), these will be explored graphically in Figures 3 and 4. Figure 3 shows the position domain, and the RMS differences can be seen in a few cases where the default mode errors increased faster than the land profile. An example of this divergence is most obvious around the 1500-second mark of the test during periods GNSS is most heavily blocked.

    Low Dynamics Test. The low dynamics test is designed to emulate conditions experienced by machine control, agriculture and mining applications. In this situation, GNSS availability is generally not the limiting factor and can be used to control the low frequency position and velocity errors of the INS system. The difficulty is managing the attitude, especially azimuth, errors because attitude parameters are very hard to observe without significant rotations or accelerations (Figures 5 and 6).

    The low dynamics test was collected in an open-sky environment and consisted of traveling in a straight line on a rural road for roughly 2 km at an average speed of 10–15 km/h.

    As this type of scenario provides little physical impetus, the azimuth and gyroscope biases are not observable. The reason for this is due to the use of the first-order differential equations to estimate the navigation system errors. Essentially, the differential equations define how the position, velocity and attitude errors change (grow) over time based on each other and the IMU errors. The observability of a particular update is tied to additional states through the off-diagonal elements of the derived transition matrix with the accelerations and rotations experienced by the system.

    The overall RMS solution errors for RTK are provided in Table 2. As evident by the results presented, the position and velocity errors are clearly constrained by the continuous RTK-level GNSS position regardless of whether the land profile is enabled or not. The real differentiator in the land profile is the attitude performance due to the use of phase windup as a constraint. Moreover, the attitude improvements are certainly tied to IMU quality.

    TABLE 2. RTK RMS errors for low dynamics.
    TABLE 3. RTK RMS errors, parking garage (500s).

    UUT1 exhibited a noticeable improvement in the attitude performance, while the higher performance IMUs did not. This is not entirely unexpected as the precision of the phase windup is lower than that of the higher grade IMUs.

    Looking at the data graphically, Figure 7 shows the effect of land profile on positioning performance in this scenario. The two solutions are indistinguishable on the plot, and are all within standard RTK-level error bounds as was indicated in the RMS table.

    Figure 7 shows the attitude accuracy with and without the land profile enabled. Again, the largest gains are seen on the entry-level UUT1, so this is the graphic shown below. This shows how the error peaks of the azimuth estimates are constrained. All the sharp corrections in each plot correspond to the vehicle turning around at the end of each 2-Km line and illustrates how much more powerful a rotation observation can be in azimuth accuracy overall.

    FIGURE 7. UUT1 attitude error (std vs. land).

    Parking Garage Test. This test was carried out at the Calgary International Airport and was selected to show the INS solution degradation during extended complete GNSS outages. The test consisted of an initialization period in open sky conditions to allow the SPAN filter time to properly converge, followed by a 500-second period within the parking garage. During the interval within the parking garage there were no GNSS measurements available.

    Figure 8 provides a trajectory of the test environment. The time spent inside the parking structure is evident on the center bottom of the image.

    FIGURE 8. Parking garage test trajectory.

    Unlike urban canyon environments that contain partial GNSS information, this exhibits an extended period of complete GNSS outage. During this type of scenario, the IMU specifications become much more significant. IMU errors directly translate to the duration the solution can propagate before the accumulated low-frequency errors of the IMU grow to unacceptable levels. System performance during the outage degrades according to the system errors at the time of the outage and the system noise. The velocity errors increase linearly as a function of attitude and accelerometer bias errors. The attitude errors will increase linearly as a function of the unmodeled gyro bias error. The position error is a quadratic function of accelerometer bias and attitude errors.

    Position results from each IMU are shown for UUT 1 in Figure 9. This plot shows the error with the land profile on and off. Without the land profile, the second-order position degradation in an unconstrained system is clearly visible.

    FIGURE 9. UUT1 position error (std vs. land ).

    By enabling the land profile, the filter constrains IMU errors by utilizing a velocity model for wheeled vehicles. With the constraints, the position errors are startlingly reduced for UUT1 and then progressively less impactful as the IMU quality increases in UUT2 and UUT3, respectively. This makes sense as the IMU error growth is progressively smaller in those IMUs, so the effect of mitigating them is also reduced.

    Extended GNSS Outage Test. An extension of the parking garage test is to evaluate the performance in a much longer outage. Instead of 10 minutes, an outage of one hour was tested. Also, due to the extremely long GNSS outage bridging, the effects of adding a DMI sensor (odometer) will also be explored as they are able to be used as a major additional aiding source.

    Table 4. Percent error / distance traveled over 1-hour GNSS outage.

    The most common measure of dead-reckoning performance is error over distance traveled (EDT). Due to the very long duration outages in this test, the errors will be reported in error over distance traveled to conform to the typical reporting method. This test was conducted in a mixture of highways and suburban streets with an average speed of 65 Km/h, incorporating a moderate amount of dynamics.

    This effect can be seen over the duration of the entire outage as well in Figure 9. In this case, the points are the RMS error over several tests. and the light background shroud represents the one-sigma confidence as time progresses. The confidence increases over time as the overall distance traveled also increases.

    FIGURE 10. Land profile EDT with and without DMI aid over 1-hour GNSS outage.

    Results and Conclusions

    In testing a range of IMUs in some challenging scenarios, this paper has sought to illustrate what kind of performance is achievable using each kind of system. An added complexity is looking at what effect certain inertial constraint algorithms have on this solution.

    Although low-cost MEMs IMUs are continuing to greatly improve in quality and stability, the end application is still highly correlated to the overall performance of a selected INS system. For a great many applications, the MEMS devices in combination with a robust inertial filter can meet requirements and provide excellent value. However, some applications continue to require higher end sensors, and possibly post-processing to meet their needs.

    The ability of SPAN to utilize partial GNSS measurements such as pseudorange, delta phase and vehicle constraints means even low-cost MEMs are capable of providing a robust solution in challenging GNSS conditions. However, this tightly coupled integration is limited in cases where GNSS is completely denied or when in low dynamic conditions.

    INS profiles using velocity constraints, phase windup and robust alignment routines have been shown to provide substantial aid to the INS solution in tough conditions, such as GNSS denied or low dynamics. These improvements were shown to exhibit greater impact as the IMU sensor precision decreases. These abilities, in conjunction with the existing tightly coupled architecture of SPAN and the ever-increasing accuracy of MEMS, IMUs indicate that robust GNSS/INS solutions will continue to proliferate at lower cost targets. However, very precise applications such as mapping will continue to rely on higher quality sensors to meet strict accuracy requirements.

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    The authors thank Trevor Condon and Patrick Casiano of NovAtel for collecting and helping to process the data presented in this article, and to Sheena Dixon for her tireless editing.

    Manufacturers

    NovAtel SPAN technology on the NovAtel OEM7 receiver is the testing and development platform for this research. NovAtel OEM7700 GNSS receiver cards and a NovAtel wideband Pinwheel antenna were employed. The inertial units under test were an Epson G320 (low-power, small-size MEMS IMU); Litef μIMU-IC (larger tactical-grade performance IMU still based on MEMS sensors); and a Litef ISA-100C (near navigation-grade IMU using fiber-optic gyros (FOG). Although all are excellent performers in their class and capable of providing a navigation-quality solution, the intent is to show the potential limitations that might arise due to the intended application.


    RYAN DIXON is the chief engineer of the SPAN product line at NovAtel Inc., leading a highly skilled team in the development of GNSS augmentation technology. He holds a BSc. in geomatics engineering from the University of Calgary.

    MICHAEL BOBYE is a principal geomatics engineer at NovAtel and has participated in a variety of research projects since joining in 1999. Bobye holds a BSC. in geomatics engineering from the University of Calgary.